heheh, sheese, I sense another 300+ post here over something that everybody is going to take the wrong way, so I'll add my 2 cents
.
We really dig that there are people that can point out the flaws in the game from a historic / accuracy perspective. We've done a ton of research, but alas, there's SO much to WWII that it's really hard to cover it all. Plus with all the little things that went on in the war (details like units customizing their armor with ad-hoc inventions, customizing paint schemes in the field, etc...), you're bound to get a slightly different perspective on everything because it was all out there. It's great because our 2D and 3D artists are dedicated to the visuals of the game. If it's a visual flaw that we can make more accurate given the time and resources and limitaions that we have to abide by, then we're glad to
. What we don't like (as I've seen on this board from several people) is when we miss a detail, and someone goes and proclaims that this game is going to suck, it's going to be no fun, their not going for realism, blah blah blah, attack, attack, attack........etc.... That's when we have an issue. We are trying our damndest to make this the best balance of accuracy, and fun gameplay, given the universe we are set in (the Medal of Honor, existing universe set it WWII that is). To say such things like because we are 'NOT ALLOWED' to have blood is going to make this a kids game, and that we're not really trying because a Panzer Grenadiers uniform is missing a stripe, is fairly upsetting and unfair.
I can totally see Waff's and Burgen's point of view, as well as others. I think all they are saying is that when they point out an inaccuracy, they do so in the hopes that we might be able to fix it. To attack them for doing so really isn't called for (and I've seen that happen on this board as well). I mean, if Waff posts something about.....say the MG42 model we have, and then someone posts something in retort like, "Sheese, you're so nit-picky, we don't care about such things, so just shut-up why don't ya!!!" That's really not necessary. He's just pointing out something that he'd like to see fixed, to attack him for that or say anything really negative about it isn't really called for. I mean, why say something like that when it's not even his point in posting the comment? Why even initiate the attack ya know? I mean if Waff came across like, "you guys suck, you can't even get this minor detail right you bunch of dickweeds, you don't know anything about WWII you morons!!!" Then I could see an attack warranted (because even I'd be saying something then
p. But if he's just stating some factual information in an informative manner, he's not really doing anything wrong now is he?
.
Also, something I wanted to mention about when flaws are pointed out, that some of them are done for gameplay and balance reasons. For example, the M1 Garand reload animation was mentioned as being a bit too quick. This is a really hard thing to balance when going for accuracy. The weapon reloads can't take an obscenely long amount of time because, quite frankly, it's a game
. Trying to create the reload animations with something that is accurate, yet balanced from a gameplay perspective, is quite difficult. Conscessions have to be made on one end or the other, and most of the time it's in favor of gameplay balance. Granted, that doesn't mean we're going to put in something totally wacky and unrealistic, but it's probably not going to be 100 % accurate all the time. For example, the Springfield .03 sniper rifle. In real life to reload the stripper clip, you'd have to remove the scope (or if the weapon is equiped, slide the scope forward) to allow for the clip to be postioned, slide the bullets into the gun off of the clip, and then slide the scope back into position. Most of the time they'd just reload the 5 rounds by hand. Now to do this 100% accurately, you'd have one hell of a long reload time for that gun after you've fired those 5 rounds (in either case of moving the scope, or reloading the rounds by hand). If there's one thing I hear complaining about in a game a lot is a long reload on a weapon. Granted, having a balanced reload for the power of the weapon is ok (such as the reload for a sniper rifle should take some time for balance), but to have it take an extremely long time (as it would if we did it 100% realistically), people would get upset. So we come up with a compromise of something that's along the lines of realism, looks real, but might have to fudge a factor or two for the sake of the timing (the sniper reload is in the gameplay video clips out there, and no-one has mentioned anything about it so far other than the timing on the bolt is off
. So please mention the flaws because if we can fix them, or find a better way we will try (again, try being the key word here
, but also keep this in mind if when you see the finished product, it didn't get changed
.
Anyways, there goes another novel from myself, but just offering a different perspective on it
------------------
-----------------------
Latuh fuh U,
Benson
benson@2015.com
"We don't introduce or cause bugs in the game, we merely find and bring to light the inadequacies within the code."
-regarding level designers